Jeff Rafter wrote: > > I'd like to ask once more with some changes (min -> max). > > > > The following is illegal since fixed = 'true' ? > > > > <simpleType name='myType2'> > > <restriction> > > <simpleType> > > <restriction base='integer'> > > <maxExclusive value='11' fixed='true'/> > > </restriction> > > </simpleType> > > <maxInclusive value='10'/> > > </restriction> > > </simpleType> > > Correct-- it is illegal [1]. > > "If {fixed} is true, then types for which the current type is the {base type > definition} cannot specify a value for maxInclusive other than {value}. " > > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#dt-maxInclusive I don't think this rule can be applied to the above example. The above [1] only applies if both facets had been maxInclusive. However, in the above example the base type has maxExlusive = "11" and then the derived type has maxInclusive="10". I'm not sure where this is in the spec or if it's allowed to redefine maxInclusive although maxExclusive is set to fixed. I've found this in the definition for maxExclusive [1]: "It is an _error_ for both _maxInclusive_ and _maxExclusive_ to be specified in the same derivation step of a datatype definition." In the above example maxInclusive and maxExclusive are not in the same derivation step so I guess it's valid (then again maybe not...) Cheers, /Eddie [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/xmlschema-2/#maxExclusive-cossReceived on Thursday, 7 June 2001 02:47:29 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Sunday, 6 December 2009 18:13:34 GMT